well the way i see it is this disorder creates "confusion" in the womb about what gender the foetus develops as.

helps to define the dividing line so to speak between the genders.

to me this treatment is more a erm...cure...(horrible word) for hermaphrodism more than homosexuality, however I suppose it gould lead to gender confusion too. Now of course is homosexuality due to gender confusion? i don't think it is but who knows for sure.

It's okay, you don't have to reply or anything.

Your friend suffering from CAH doesn't prove anything, it's bad argumentation. CAH is not a fun condition, but the homosexuality part of it isn't any different than homosexuality in other people.

And there is no such thing as normal homosexuality and unnormal homosexuality.

would you be fine using the terms typical and atypical then.   this being atypical because its connected to a serious medical condition that can seriously affect all aspects of ones sexual self and isnt present in the typical or average homosexual.

Typical and atypical, yes absolutely.

I always love stories like this, they bring out the argument between whether homosexuality is a lifestyle choice or not between gay rights groups and religious spokespeople, whilst the entire time there's a bunch of chemists, biologists and psychologists sitting on the sidelines, eating popcorn and laughing at both arguments.

In my opinion, the drug is probably ok to use under very controlled circumstances. CAH seems like something we should be trying to prevent, and we let parents give permission for medical treatments with much more serious side effects for their children than the altering of their sexual preferences. Obviously if the unborn child doesn't have CAH then doing it should get you locked up.

FTR what would be the negative effects of this drug if it were used by accident on a male fetus, which was confused with a female one?

*Sigh* You do realise that you applied a false terminology that I never used for my point? I mean I even said directly to you that you took my quote out of context. I never used the term "normal" in the way accuse me of. The only time I even used the word was to relate the chances of being homosexual to that of the general population. Talk about bad argumentation.

The specific quote you picked out said "regular conditions", which is far closer to the "typical/Atypical" terminology that MrBubbles used than the "normal/unnormal" terminology you pinned to my point.

Here you are clearly dividing homosexuality into normal and abnormal types:

"Basically the homosexuality in CAH isn't really natural, it's a symptom of the condition, and therefore different from regular homosexuality. It's not the same."

And you still haven't explained why these guys would suffer from their homosexuality while the other guys would not:

"To put it simply: Homosexuals who are so under regular conditions do not suffer from it. Whereas people with CAH do suffer from their homosexuality."

Isn't he saying that women who have CAH and are lesbians because of that are suffering from the engative effects of CAH? I mean, I doubt lesbiansim is the worst effect of CAH.

He is saying that too, obviously. But that wasn't the only thing he's saying, and I'm addressing the homsexuality part as you can see.